Ignore Windows 7, Stick with XP and It Will Cost You.

[JMH]

Undoubtedly, Windows XP continues to get a consistent amount of love from its very loyal users, after all, the OS continues to run on over 65.49% of computers worldwide. Citing findings from Market research firm Techaisle, Microsoft is warning that ignoring Windows 7 and failing to upgrade computers while choosing to ride Windows XP for all it’s got on older hardware comes with inherent financial costs. Techaisle indicates that the maintenance costs of older PCs running XP can be as much as 1.5 times higher than for newer Windows 7-based machines.

Source -
Ignore Windows 7, Stick with XP and It Will Cost You - According to Microsoft - Softpedia

 

[Boris]

Hmmm not exactly information from an unbiased source. :sarc:

 

[MattRainier]

I keep warning my customers of this - sticking with XP, while it may be familiar, will eventually kill you. Maintenance costs, lower security...they all add up.

 

[motc7]

Hmmm not exactly information from an unbiased source. :sarc:

Doesn't matter the source. Why would you want to continue on an antiquated platform on antiquated hardware? The movement is to 64 bit, and that is with both computers and all the other accessories and gadgets.

At this point, if you aren't moving to Windows 7, you are behind the 8 ball.

 

[sygnus21]

Why would you want to continue on an antiquated platform on antiquated hardware?

Cost. Not everyone can afford to do the various upgrades for various reasons.

The movement is to 64 bit, and that is with both computers and all the other accessories and gadgets.

For computer enthusiasts this is true, for the average everyday internet/e-mail user, (which far outnumbers us enthusiasts) not so true. In fact, I'm 50/50 on the issue of whether you need a 64-bit OS or not...but that's a debate for another time, and thread

At this point, if you aren't moving to Windows 7, you are behind the 8 ball.

Not everyone needs\wants the latest and greatest, however I do agree that upgrading to the latest OS enhances security and other features, especially as more and more people do more and more things online, i.e. banking and financial transactions.

My two cents

 

[fseal]

Yeah the transition from XP to W7 should happen "naturally" whatever that means to the person or group.

Meaning it should not be adversely avoided for long periods of time, it just makes more work in the end. People should be doing whatis necessary to transition now, so that when they DO upgrade their hardware, they are ready and don't have to spend time downgrading to XP every time a new machine or laptop comes into the building. (That single act alone nllifies the cost of W7 completely).

Then upgrades in hardware can proceed on an as needed basis.

This requires some up front work to offset much MORE work later, and that's a concept that is in short supply in most places. Always has been and always will be I'm afraid.

 

[Desslok]

Where i live, and the cost of electricity, the ability of 7 to sleep and wake up correctly every time, lets the power saving features pay itself off pretty quickly.

 

[noobvious]

I think maybe a lot of those clinging to XP simply are afraid of change.

 

[CarlTR6]

I think maybe a lot of those clinging to XP simply are afraid of change.

That and older hardware. If it works, why change?

 

[madtownidiot]

Just because it wasn't taken off the shelf at Best Buy last week does not mean it's obsolete. I don't know about anyone else, but I think it's kind of stupid to waste money replacing tools that still work, especially when a new one isn't going to do the job any better.

 

[Little Darwin]

Even though the article targeted small businesses, which have their own constraints, that is not the segment that I know.

Corporations still on XP need to consider the cost of migrating their users and infrastructure in a logical way. It can cost big dollars just to plan an upgrade in a large corporation before a single dollar is spent on hardware or software.

I happen to know at least one quasi-governmental organization is still in the midst of upgrading to their latest XP build, and it has been under way for over a year. At work, I still run XP with Office 2003. running on 512K of RAM and a 36GB hard drive on a single core processor. My mouse still has a ball in it (or actually it did until last month when I got tired of cleaning it and I brought an optical mouse in from home).

 

[madtownidiot]

Shhh... a lot of my customers still use XP ... it's job security ...lol

 

[sygnus21]

When I was in the military we used to project out to about 5 years for major computer upgrades and budget annually on small upgrades such as hardware. This would help stem costs when migrating to newer systems since they were replaced on a priority/as needed base. In short, not every office or organization was upgrade en mass.

When you're a large corporation like the military that's the best way to do it as everyone doesn’t need the latest and greatest and thus allows you to migrate at a slower, more cost effective way.

 

[FuturDreamz]

I think maybe a lot of those clinging to XP simply are afraid of change.

That and older hardware. If it works, why change?

Compatibility.
I picked up an old Dell that has Win2000 on it which refused to work without a PS/2 mouse and keyboard.
since all of mine were USB, I tried installing Windows XP and DSL-N, which would've still run fine (I checked the specs, it had 512mb of ram and a PIII)
problem is, it refused to boot from it's cd drive or USB drives, so the only way to get it to work would be with a floppy. none of the other computers have a floppy drive, a USB one is expensive (to me), and the computer itself is unusable without a good OS.
it went in the trash

 

[pasquanel]

I can think of a couple reasons not to rush into a new OS, ME and Vista come to mind.
I work for a small municipality and the business software for the Town Office and Police dept.
were very slow in getting compatible with Vista and later Win. 7. We had to downgrade al the new machines to XP.

I think Windows 7 is great but if all one needs is to browse the web and e-mail run a printer etc XP is fine.
The latest and greatest OS in the fastest machine is still limited by your Internet connection.

 

[rev1775]

Well, I can tell you the company I work for will not make a change from xp anytime soon, at least for the desktop side.. there are several thousand pc's we have and the majority of them are using PC SAS and it doesn't appear that they will be windows 7 ready till mid yr. or later.

 

[motc7]

I can think of a couple reasons not to rush into a new OS, ME and Vista come to mind.
I work for a small municipality and the business software for the Town Office and Police dept.
were very slow in getting compatible with Vista and later Win. 7. We had to downgrade al the new machines to XP.

Slow is the word used, I would venture to say lazy. Sorry, but having to downgrade systems today to XP just to run the Town's software is a bit ridiculous and frankly dangerous.

I think Windows 7 is great but if all one needs is to browse the web and e-mail run a printer etc XP is fine.
The latest and greatest OS in the fastest machine is still limited by your Internet connection.

That works for now, but what happens when web apps, and the like no longer are compatible with older systems?

Plus I know that vista and ME were stinkers of the highest order, but then again, XP wasn't that great either. honestly, with Windows 7, I've never been this excited and had such a pleasurable experience since Win95 came out.

 

[Kaizen]

On my machines XP performs noticeably better than Windows 7. I beta tested Windows 7 for almost a year before RTM and used it for my primary OS, but when it was over, it was time to go back to XP, not because it was familiar, but because it runs better.
If businesses are happy with XP, it would be insane for them to upgrade to Windows 7 at this time. Windows 7 is buggy and will not provide a smooth transition if there is a lot of legacy hardware peripherals that still need to be used.
I will probably not be buying or building a new computer until Windows 8, because I don't want to have a new XP based machine, but there is nothing to take its place for me yet.
If there are major improvements in processor power before Windows 8, I would consider using Windows 7 again on a new machine because I know it is optimized for multi-threading, but for now it cannot keep up with XP.

 

[fseal]

The processing power of a new machine today compared to the last time machines cam preloaded woith Xp is INSANE.

There have been massive speed increases in processors in the last 4 years. Compare an i7 to a core 2 duo even an i5 compared to a core 2 duo, the hot new processor towards the end of XPs shelf life. Same goes for video cards. A new gaming rig today with W7 would blow doors off anything at any price 4 years ago running XP.

 

[CarlTR6]

I can think of a couple reasons not to rush into a new OS, ME and Vista come to mind.
I work for a small municipality and the business software for the Town Office and Police dept.
were very slow in getting compatible with Vista and later Win. 7. We had to downgrade al the new machines to XP.

Slow is the word used, I would venture to say lazy. Sorry, but having to downgrade systems today to XP just to run the Town's software is a bit ridiculous and frankly dangerous.

I beg to differ. I worked for a rural county for six years and was working for them when Vista was released. The IT folks were top notch. They downgraded machines purchased with Vista installed for compatibility. Some departments in the county run custom software designed for specific purposes. IT could not take the chance that software used by Emergency Management, the Sheriffs Department, the court system, the CAD and GIS software for Engineering, etc would run on Vista without thoroughly testing it first. It is not a matter of being lazy. It is a matter of doing their jobs to keep the county's network up and running and to keep the various departments' software up and running. This same scenario apples to businesses large and small.

MS is not responsible to make sure users applications will run on a new OS; that is the responsibility of the IT folks in government and business. Caution is the word and it is very prudent to proceed slowly.

I think Windows 7 is great but if all one needs is to browse the web and e-mail run a printer etc XP is fine.
The latest and greatest OS in the fastest machine is still limited by your Internet connection.

That works for now, but what happens when web apps, and the like no longer are compatible with older systems?

Web apps may not be a concern to some businesses and government entities. The mechanic in the maintenance shop could care less about a web app while on the job. He simply wants the maintenance requisition software to work and the parts inventory software to work.

Plus I know that vista and ME were stinkers of the highest order, but then again, XP wasn't that great either. honestly, with Windows 7, I've never been this excited and had such a pleasurable experience since Win95 came out.

I really like Windows Seven and I share your enthusiasm. However, there are vast differences between a home user, a gamer, and the network in a work place environment. Government entities and businesses simply cannot afford, time wise or money wise, the latest and the greatest just to have the latest and the greatest.